The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete as unopposed nomination. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• HNoMS Tunsberg Castle (K374) → Castle class corvette (links to redirect • history • stats)

Deletion - currently linked from ((Castle class corvette)), but all other blue links are to articles. I see no point in this redirect, which may actually dissuade an editor from creating an article on the ship in the belief that it already exists. Mjroots (talk) 19:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Black Temple → World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (links to redirect • history • stats) 
• Tempest Keep → World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (links to redirect • history • stats) 
• Hellfire Citadel → World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (links to redirect • history • stats) 
• Coilfang Reservoir → World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Non-notable location within the game. Not mentioned in target article, not suitable for inclusion in target article. As such, it doesn't strike me as aiding readers/users at all, instead only making them believe we hold the relevant information, when infact we don't per our notability policies. Taelus (talk) 18:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note bundled these four nominations together as they are all basically the same, each a location within the game which is not mentioned in the target. Thanks, --Taelus (talk) 18:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete, not mentioned in the target and potentially confusing for someone who types in one of these terms and then has to figure out for himself why he wound up at a WoW article. These are hardly among the most useless redirects I've seen around here, though, as they would at least indicate which expansion pack these levels belong to.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 20:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only for those who are already somewhat in the know. For some readers, these pointing to a game page with nothing relating to the topic may be confusing. The way I see it, is that there are two ways these redirects may be stumbled upon: Firstly, by a user in the know, who will search the terms, be redirected, and go "Yes they are related to the game... I knew that, but where is the information on the topic?". Secondly, by a user who doesn't know where the exact term is from, who will end up going. "So its a game... But what about this game has anything to do with the thing I typed in?". My personal opinion is that we shouldn't have such redirects, as they mislead readers into assuming we provide content which we do not, and will not due to our policies. A non-existant page will be more likely to help readers by sending them to google to look up the terms, rather than them trying to use the Wikipedia search tool in the hope the information for their search term is hidden away somewhere, and that the redirect they used is broken. --Taelus (talk) 21:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Dabify. Eat yer heart out. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The Other Guy → José Carreras (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Redirect only makes sense for Seinfeld geeks (such as myself). In the article, the joke is only discussed in footnote 10. Very unlikely search term and title of a potential article on the hit song by Little River Band. Pichpich (talk) 12:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The episode was based on real life perceptions and there's no reason Wikipedia can't be accurate and humorous. If people forget José Carreras' name (which they frequently do) Wikipedia should be able to accommodate that by use of this redirect. If there's a better use for the term it will get replaced.Sturmovik (talk) 13:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Little River Band discography#Singles - one of the last major hit singles by the Australian musical group. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 23:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Create a disambiguate article, there's probably other uses. 117Avenue (talk) 00:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate if there are enough uses (it's a fairly generic phrase, so that's likely) or retarget as above if a disambig isn't warranted. Mobius Clock 15:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate, google.co.uk hits are primarily for "Chuck vs the Other Guy", but also bring up hits for songs by B2K and Avril Lavigne, and The Other Guys. Thryduulf (talk) 20:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Dabify - title of several songs that were national hits, at least one album, episodes of at least two television series, and one motion picture... not to mention uses of "Other Guy" in titles of various articles. B.Wind (talk) 16:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Mount Rushmore State → South Dakota (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Despite the official nickname being The Mount Rushmore State, it is a viable search term. 117Avenue (talk) 01:27, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep, an official monicker for the state (give or take the word "The") which is on its flag, as you can read here (see also here).  Glenfarclas  (talk) 20:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - a beginning "the" is often forgotten. Thus this is a very likely search term. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 23:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, agree this is a likely search term and a useful redirect. –Grondemar 02:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, no comment. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The redirect was created on 13 December 2009 and the author was blocked on 24 December 2009, so speedy deletion is not an option. Thryduulf (talk) 20:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, per the others recommending this, it seems a very useful search term and gets quite a few hits. Thryduulf (talk) 20:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Perfectly feasible search term. • ɔ ʃ → 22:53, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope. - generally seems to be accepted that this quote is famous and iconic enough to warrant a redirect, and that the specific film it appears in is the most appropriate target. ~ mazca ^talk 19:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• A long time ago in a galaxy far far away → Star Wars (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment seems like a reasonable search term for me. It's definitely not nonsense. It might be better pointed at Star Wars: A New Hope, since that's the movie that uses the term... 70.29.208.247 (talk) 00:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It's a famous line, and if (hard to believe) someone doesn't know what its from they may search the term. (Comment: all six movies use it). 117Avenue (talk) 00:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope - iconic opening line originated with this film (and paraphrased in the second paragraph of the article on the movie). 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, ....
  • The user was not banned when this redirect was created. Thryduulf (talk) 20:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to wikiquotes, or delete. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Even Wikiquote does not use quotes as article titles or redirects. (Film article already has a ((Wikiquote)) sisterlink.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or retarget, this seems like a useful search term to me, and while it doesn't get massive traffic it does get some. I have no preference on which Star Wars article this gets pointed to though. Thryduulf (talk) 20:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)ic[reply]
• Retarget to movie article for Star Wars IV: A New Hope, not the series. This has been readily identifiable with the first movie for over 30 years. Notable quotations from various movies generally don't have redirects, but iconic ones do. B.Wind (talk) 17:27, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to A New Hope. An iconic line immediately associated with Episode IV; it can only help to have it point there. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back. Sufficiently iconic quote to warrant a redirect, and per both this discussion and the one a few months ago, the specific movie it relates to is felt to be the most appropriate target. ~ mazca ^talk 19:16, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Luke, I am your father → Darth Vader (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment wasn't this already gone through RfD last year, which pointed it to Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, because that's where the famous line occurs? It's not nonsense, since it's a line from a film (or a likely variant of that). People also might want to figure out which film it came from. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 00:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was... last December. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 19:20, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It's a famous line, and if (hard to believe) someone doesn't know what its from they may search the term, but I am uncertain of what it should redirect to. 117Avenue (talk) 00:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back - iconic line comes from this film; revelation is mentioned in plot summary. Shall we tackle "Do you feel lucky, punk?", too? 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, ....
• Retarget to wikiquotes, or delete. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Even Wikiquote does not use quotes as article titles or redirects. (Film article already has a ((Wikiquote)) sisterlink.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to movie article for Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back. This has been readily identifiable with the movie for about 30 years. Notable quotations from various movies generally don't have redirects, but iconic ones do. This was retargeted (by consensus) in an RfD last December. B.Wind (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Empire Strikes Back. The most famous line of the entire series, perhaps? Immediately identifiable with the film, and can only help by being pointed there. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:29, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back. Sufficiently iconic quote to warrant a redirect, and per both this discussion and the one a few months ago, the specific movie it relates to is felt to be the most appropriate target. ~ mazca ^talk 19:16, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• No, Luke, I am your father → Darth Vader (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment wasn't this already gone through RfD last year, which pointed it to Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, because that's where the famous line occurs? It's not nonsense, since it's a line from a film (or a likely variant of that). People also might want to figure out which film it came from. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 00:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was... last December. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 19:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, ....
• Retarget to wikiquotes, or delete. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Even Wikiquote does not use quotes as article titles or redirects. (Film article already has a ((Wikiquote)) sisterlink.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment this redirect already has an old RFD on the issue, from 2009 December. The nominator failed to mention this fact. Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2009_December_6#No.2C_Luke.2C_I_am_your_father. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 07:12, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to movie article for Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back. This has been readily identifiable with the movie for about 30 years. Notable quotations from various movies generally don't have redirects, but iconic ones do. This was retargeted (by consensus) in an RfD last December. B.Wind (talk) 17:33, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Empire Strikes Back. The most famous line of the entire series, perhaps? Immediately identifiable with the film, and can only help by being pointed there. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:30, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back. Sufficiently iconic quote to warrant a redirect, and per both this discussion and the one a few months ago, the specific movie it relates to is felt to be the most appropriate target. ~ mazca ^talk 19:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Luke I am your father → Darth Vader (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment wasn't this already gone through RfD last year, which pointed it to Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, because that's where the famous line occurs? It's not nonsense, since it's a line from a film (or a likely variant of that). People also might want to figure out which film it came from. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 00:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was... last December. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 19:19, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back - iconic line comes from this film; revelation is mentioned in plot summary. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, ....
• Retarget to wikiquotes, or delete. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Even Wikiquote does not use quotes as article titles or redirects. (Film article already has a ((Wikiquote)) sisterlink.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to movie article for Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back. This has been readily identifiable with the movie for about 30 years. Notable quotations from various movies generally don't have redirects, but iconic ones do. This was retargeted (by consensus) in an RfD last December. B.Wind (talk) 17:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Empire Strikes Back. I personally find the inherent pause and comma to be an essential part of the quote. I do not expect others to be so pedantic. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:34, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget - To The Empire Strikes Back, per B.Wind/Amory. About as iconic as a quote can get, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 20:30, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete, consensus here is that it is too ambiguous to point to one target, and that it is very difficult to retarget. It isn't suitable for disambiguation per the Manual of Style. --Taelus (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I am your father → Darth Vader (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete very unlikely target, there are so many famous film clips that use this line. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 00:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back - iconic line comes from this film; revelation is mentioned in plot summary. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it's also a famous line from very many teen movies where an angry father yells "I am your father!" to a teen offspring who is misbehaving... 70.29.208.247 (talk) 05:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, ....
• Retarget to wikiquotes, or delete. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Even Wikiquote does not use quotes as article titles or redirects. (Film article already has a ((Wikiquote)) sisterlink.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to movie article for Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back. This has been readily identifiable with the movie for about 30 years. Notable quotations from various movies generally don't have redirects, but iconic ones do. Note the difference between this quotation and "Because I'm your father" (mentioned by IP above). B.Wind (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete While clearly associated with Darth Vader and EpisodeV, it's meaning is ambiguous. Sure, any father would probably say "I'm" instead of "I am" (and it would probably start with "But...") but this is a very common phrase that I'm sure has been said to every single person who has ever known their father. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:32, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete --Taelus (talk) 08:54, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Even if The Sky Is Falling Down → Down (Jay Sean song) (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:10, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, no comment. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Even Wikiquote does not use lyrics as article titles or redirects. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• X mas → Xmas (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, a plausible mistyping.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 21:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep how is this nonsensical, why is this bad? Are you a bot that is autonominating everything? 70.29.208.247 (talk) 00:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - plausible typo. While we don't encourage the creation of redirects from plausible typos, we don't delete them once they spring into existence. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, plausible-enough typo/search term. –Grondemar 02:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep --Taelus (talk) 08:53, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Christ mas → Christmas (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, a plausible mistyping since the word itself comes from the words "Christ" and "mass." Cf. Christ Mass → Christmas.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - apparently created with stupid intent, but it seems a perfectly reasonable typo as Glenfarclas correctly points out. ~ mazca ^talk 13:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep. Recently kept at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 March 23. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Atsababy → Close to the Bone (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - properly targeted to the article for the Tom Tom Club album containing the song. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 23:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, no comment. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • This redirect was created the day before the author was blocked. Thryduulf (talk) 20:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, redirects from the titles of songs to the albums they are on are very common and usually very useful. Thryduulf (talk) 20:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • This recommendation applies to all the redirects from song titles to this album. Thryduulf (talk) 20:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep - I closed the previous RfD of this redirect (a "keep") a mere four weeks ago. This should not have returned here so quickly after the last closure. B.Wind (talk) 17:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep. Recently kept at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 March 23. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Life Is Great → Close to the Bone (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - subtitle for "Atsababy" (see above listing); redirect is targeted to article on album containing the song. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 23:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, no comment. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep - I closed the previous RfD of this redirect (a "keep") a mere four weeks ago. This should not have returned here so quickly after the last closure. B.Wind (talk) 17:42, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep. Recently kept at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 March 23. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Pleasure of Love → Close to the Bone (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - redirect properly pointed to article on Tom Tom Club album containing the song. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, no comment. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Song titles are plausible search terms. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep - I closed the previous RfD of this redirect (a "keep") a mere four weeks ago. This should not have returned here so quickly after the last closure. B.Wind (talk) 17:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep. Recently kept at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 March 23. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• On the Line Again → Close to the Bone (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Bad redirect. User who submitted this has already been indefinite blocked for 5 months. I'm cleaning up his nonsensical redirects. Manway (talk) 01:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - redirect properly pointed to the article on the Tom Tom Club album containing the song. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete if he was already banned when he created the redirect. Otherwise, no comment. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Song titles are plausible search terms. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep - I closed the previous RfD of this redirect (a "keep") a mere four weeks ago. This should not have returned here so quickly after the last closure. B.Wind (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was speedy delete – author requested deletion here, and nobody objects to it either. JamieS93^❤ 00:30, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• List of Alberta Settlements → List of Alberta settlements (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Delete It was an article renaming mistake on my part, and I think that it is an unlikely search term. If it ever were searched, the actual article would come up anyways. 117Avenue (talk) 00:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. We've discussed before the case of redirects from incorrect capitalization, and the fact is that, unless there are two different articles with the same name but different capitalization, you can type any capitalization into the search box (e.g., "lIsT oF aLbErTa SeTtLeMeNtS") and you will be taken to the article. Having redirects from alternative capitalizations is generally counterproductive because they clutter up the search box. Since your redirect was created today, there will be no incoming links from other sites to the wrongly capitalized title.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 21:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as the creator of the redirect nominated it for deletion. Tagging. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]